Quick: What’s a three-letter word for “failure to tell the whole truth”?

If you guessed “lie,” then you might have a future in crosswords. If you were left scratching your head, though, you might be in the target market for a New York Times subscription.

The Times, which wins Pulitzer Prizes for its lies, told one such half-truth in the second paragraph of a lengthy piece titled “How Biden Ignored Warnings and Lost Americans’ Faith in Immigration.”

Warnings from whom? Certainly not from the Times. No, the Trump-deranged propper-upper of serial fabulists was too busy chasing off fair-minded journalists, too busy selling credulous elitists on the notion that Donald Trump was a Russian stooge, and too busy shielding its eyes and ears from the manifest decrepitude of Joe Biden to suggest that his open-borders policy might not sit too well with the American people.

As for that second paragraph, it’s actually a bouillabaisse of lies. See how many you can detect: “Mr. Biden had pledged to treat unauthorized immigrants more humanely than President Donald J. Trump, who generated widespread backlash by separating migrant children from their parents.”

First, “unauthorized immigrants” are in fact illegal aliens, and the Times’s failure to report them as such tells us all we need to know about its editorial bias. Second, Biden didn’t merely pledge to treat these lawbreakers “more humanely” than Trump. No, during a nationally televised Democrat presidential debate in 2019, he out-groveled his fellow candidates by pledging to “immediately surge to the border all those people who are seeking asylum,” thereby not only inviting a calamitous wave of as many as 20 million illegals to overwhelm our southern border but also giving them the asylum-seeking blueprint for doing so. (Say what you will about illegal aliens, but they’re not as stupid as open-borders Democrats.) And third, while Trump officials did separate children from their ostensible parents, they did so not only to stem the tide of illegal immigration, but also to protect these children from being trafficked for sexual exploitation.

Back to the Times, for the record, the words “to,” “than,” “by,” and “from” were also lies.

The article is written by some guy named Christopher Flavelle, whom the Times says is “covering how President Trump is transforming the federal government.” Too bad the Times never saw fit to assign a reporter to cover how Joe Biden (and Barack Obama before him) succeeded in “fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

Flavelle, though, is not alone in concocting this caper. Just under the subhead, the Times brags that Flavelle “interviewed more than 30 former Biden administration officials who worked on immigration and border policy, as well as members of Congress, state and local officials, lawyers and migrants.”

Here’s a question: Where on earth were these “more than 30” accomplices during the four disastrous years of the Biden presidency?

In case the thrust of the article is still unclear, Flavelle writes: “A New York Times examination of Mr. Biden’s record found that he and his closest advisers repeatedly rebuffed recommendations that could have addressed the border crisis faster, and eased what became a potent issue for Mr. Trump as he sought to return to the White House and justify the aggressive tactics roiling American cities today.”

Better five years late than never, I suppose. In a related story, the Times now reports that Dewey didn’t beat Truman.

It would’ve been nice if maybe the Times and its fellow leftist lickspittles had paid more attention to Biden’s immigration policies as they were unfolding, rather than as they led up to a presidential election and a reckoning with the American people. The Times had four years to dig into the question of whether open borders and unchecked immigration were good and popular public policies.

At its essence, this is an awful story about a cognitively addled Autopen President. But it’s also a story about the calculating way that the Democrats do politics. Notice how the warnings to Biden only came in the context of his political fortunes and the political fortunes of his party. They didn’t warn him because they thought open borders was a lousy and ruinous policy; they only warned him because they thought it would threaten their hold on power.

What the Times is trying to do here is wash its own hands of complicity in a disastrous policy — a policy whose awful effects we’ll continue to struggle with long after Donald Trump has cleaned up as much of the mess as possible.

Let’s face it: By way of inviting and allowing an open-borders surge during the Biden years, the Democrats have succeeded in changing the very fabric of our nation. We can’t compound that crime by letting legacy media organs like the Times rewrite its history.